Evidence from illegal search disclosing cannabis cultivation is admissible in court

After a person who had been stopped by the police on suspicion of driving under the influence had stated that he used cannabis as a pain reliever, the head of the police patrol decided to search the person's home. It was discovered that he was growing cannabis. The Court of Appeal found that the search had been illegal. The Court of Appeal's majority also found that evidence related to the search was inadmissible. Consequently, the defendant was acquitted in the Court of Appeal of having manufactured drugs, see section 231 of the Penal Code. The Supreme Court also found that the search had been illegal, but that the evidence was nonetheless admissible. The majority of the Court of Appeal had emphasised the "disciplinary consideration", in that excluding the evidence might force the police to comply with terms of the law more carefully. The Supreme Court assumed that administrative measures to improve police practice had been put into use and had an effect. The "disciplinary consideration" could thus not lead to the exclusion of the evidence. The Court of Appeal's judgment with the main hearing was set aside in so far as it concerned this aspect.

Read the judgment (Norwegian only)

Area of law: Criminal procedure

Key paragraphs: 17, 18, 26, 27, 32

Justices: Øie, Bull, Falch, Bergh, Høgetveit Berg